.com.unity Forums - Maps, theory discussion

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Space Empires: IV & V (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)

- - Maps, theory discussion (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=11145)

geoschmo

January 19th, 2004 04:09 PM

Maps, theory discussion

I’ve been thinking a lot about maps lately and what makes a good one for Se4. In my opinion the bane of good map making is the ancient race trait. This is speaking specifically about maps for two player games such as Koth or the Ratings bash tourney. You try and design a good map that is even and gives both players a decent chance, and then one of them takes the ancient race, finds the choke points, grabs 75% of the map in the first ten turns and then just starves the other guy out of the game. Biding your time and building up an attack fleet, while the other guy struggles to defend himself from attack everywhere at once.

I had hoped that using spiral arm quadrants would make this less serious, but it doesn’t really help. In some cases it makes things worse because the ancient race player can come at the other guy from two directions around the center of the map.

My philosophy is that starting out close to the other guy isn’t so bad, as long as the other guy hasn’t got you boxed into 5 systems also. I stumbled on a new variant of map that I think may solve the problem. I think it gives the non-ancient race guy a decent shot, without totally taking away the advantage of the ancient race. I call it the “C-type Spiral Arm”, or C-map. All it is a spiral arm map that doesn’t connect all the way around the center.

Here’s an example:
http://seiv.pbw.cc/cmap.gif

They are generated randomly on occasion, but they are easy to manufacture. You simply create a random spiral arm and then remove a couple warp points to break the connection on one side. (Don’t forget to remove both ends of a warp point pair.) Then you set a couple common starting points approximately across the center from each other so that each player has around the same size “arm” behind him.

The ancient race player will still have an advantage of knowing where the other guy is, and on which side the map is broken. He can send everything the shortest distance between them and should still be able to capture the bulk of the map. However, the non-ancient race guy, once he figures out where the enemy is, can defend the choke points on one side and have a good amount of systems that can build up unmolested. This way even though he’s at a disadvantage in number of systems, he still has a shot at holding the other guy off and maybe breaking out if he plays well.

Another kind of map I’ve been playing around with lately is a sphere map. These aren’t so easy to make. You take a grid map, it works better if it’s a full grid, 13x9, and then make new warp points to wrap around side to side and top to bottom. This way the map really has no corners and everybody can get to anybody from any direction. It changes the strategy of the game quite a bit. There are a couple included in the FQM stadard edition if you need to see what I am talking about.

However, I have realized that it’s not really a sphere, even though I am calling it one. A sphere represented on a grid would wrap around side to side, but not top to bottom. To make a truer sphere it would need a “polar” system on top and one on bottom that was connected to all 13 of the systems along it’s edge.

I am trying to imagine what 3D shape my original idea represents. Not sure it is a shape that can be truly represented in three dimensions. Any ideas? Does it make a donut shape? What's that called? A torus? This stuff hurts my head when I think about it too much. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 19, 2004, 14:12: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Loser

January 19th, 2004 04:19 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Yes, that would be a torus.

If you take a rectangle and connect the top edge to the bottom and the left edge to the right you have a torus.

dHay	January 19th, 2004 04:28 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Wrap around the top and sides makes a donut shape.
Donut is a very good shape for limited choke points.

http://www.wolfpackempire.com/ plays a donut world.

The number of sectors in your small game maps could make it difficult to get the effect of a donut. Not enough distance, so pretty much everything is a couple of hops away. Which might remove a lot of the terrain tactics.

Cipher7071

January 19th, 2004 04:47 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Topographically speaking, the torus is really the same thing as a spiral map, unless, of course, you break it into a C like you did in your sample map. It really does sound like you are looking for the topographical equivalent of a sphere.

edit:

Instead of thinking about it in terms of your common garden variety Earth-globe, try thinking about it in terms of a ploygonal solid with a system at each of the vertices. In other words, there doesn't need to be a clear-cut 'pole' system. Any vertex might be seen as a 'pole.'

First consider a cube, and what you would need to do to represent it in 2-D on your computer screen. Draw it on a piece of paper. The trouble then becomes the number of crossing warp-lines that this makes. A cube can be un-crossed without too much difficulty (try it!), but as the number of systems (vertices) increases the map will become too messy before you get anywhere near the number of systems in a large quadrant.

That's why the compromises are made. Hope this gives you some ideas. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 19, 2004, 15:13: Message edited by: Cipher7071 ]

geoschmo

January 19th, 2004 05:12 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

Originally posted by Cipher7071:
Topographically speaking, the torus is really the same thing as a spiral map, unless, of course, you break it into a C like you did in your sample map. It really does sound like you are looking for the topographical equivalent of a sphere.

Actually, the C-map and the sphere map were two totally different trains of thought. I merely put both of them in one post. However, a torus map broken into a C is just a cylinder, right? Regardless of it's 3D shape I mean, since that is ignored for game purposes.

Quote:

Originally posted by Cipher7071:
edit: Instead of thinking about it in terms of your common garden variety Earth-globe, try thinking about it in terms of a ploygonal solid with systems at each of the vertices. In other words, there doesn't need to be a clear-cut 'pole' system.

Not toally sure what you are getting at here. Instead of having a polar system would you have interconnects between all the systems at the top? Not connecting them top to bottom, but like spokes across the end of a cylinder I mean?

Cipher7071

January 19th, 2004 05:15 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Geo, you caught me in the middle of an edit...go back to my original post.

Cipher7071

January 19th, 2004 05:16 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Geo, you caught me in the middle of an edit...go back to my original post.

tesco samoa

January 19th, 2004 05:22 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Good Idea Geo...

For that style of map... But it removes the punch and counter punch... Will they attack from the left or the right.

To me this actually improves the strengh of the Ancient as they will be able to box the none ancient in.... Where as the traditional one causes the ancient to travel in two directions. Which can be countered by a player who expands at a normal rate...

They do make for a nice variation... If your going to do games like that why not make a huge map and remove the warp point connected thing... And then the Game Admin can set up the start points before the game starts... Natually the map maker will give hints with some predefined ones http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Hmm.... This really gives me an idea on the map pack I am making...

Just some thoughts - as Mac would say.

geoschmo

January 19th, 2004 06:17 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
For that style of map... But it removes the punch and counter punch... Will they attack from the left or the right.

You are correct. But I see this as an acceptable tradeoff for giving the outnumbered defender some chance at a succesful defense. You lose some of the suprise, but is it really a suprise if you know you are going to lose, but only don't know which direction your defeat is going to come from. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Quote:

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
To me this actually improves the strengh of the Ancient as they will be able to box the none ancient in.... Where as the traditional one causes the ancient to travel in two directions. Which can be countered by a player who expands at a normal rate...

In theory I agree, but in practice the ancient race player can effectivly "cover all the doors" with a minimum amount of effort. There is some posibility that the non-ancient player if aggresive can effect a breakout, since the ancient player will, at least early on, not have much strength at every point. But the window for such a move is quite narrow, and depends a lot on luck, choosing the correct door. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif Very quickly the greater empire size means the ancient player can cover all the choke points in sufficent strength that the encircled player can't break through anywhere in sufficent numbers. At that point the game is all over but the glassing. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The C-Map doesn't eliminate this advantage, my intention wasn't to eliminate it anyway, but I think it helps the non-ancient player some as it limits the number of places they have to defend, and allows a significant portion of their empire to grow unharrased.

That's my idea anyway.

Geoschmo

Quote:

Originally posted by Cipher7071:
First consider a cube, and what you would need to do to represent it in 2-D on your computer screen. Draw it on a piece of paper. The trouble then becomes the number of crossing warp-lines that this makes. A cube can be un-crossed without too much difficulty (try it!), but as the number of systems (vertices) increases the map will become too messy before you get anywhere near the number of systems in a large quadrant.

Ah, yes. I see what you mean. That could make a very intersting map. It does give me some ideas. Might take a while to build, cause I'd have to actually move some systems around. I'll play with that and see what I can come up with.

tesco samoa

January 19th, 2004 06:20 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

i never play ancient... they just see the map right ?

spoon

January 19th, 2004 06:24 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
i never play ancient... they just see the map right ?

You can figure out which planets are starting planets by checking their size and resource values.

Loser

January 19th, 2004 07:35 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

I'm trying to figure what a tetrahedron map would look like...

One with a system at each point is pretty simple.<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> 1
/|\
2-|-3
\|/
4</pre><hr /></blockquote>So I add one more system between each, and ... well, it's complicated. To complicated for ASCII, or for me in ASCII, anyway. It starts like this.<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> 1
/ \
2---3
/ \ / \
4---5---6
\ / \ /
7---8
\ / \
9---A</pre><hr /></blockquote>Then things get complicated, because the following connections are needed in addition to these.

1-A
2-7
2-A
3-8
3-A
7-A

And that's just ten systems.

So, my coworkers now have another reason to think oddly of me, as I have spent the Last hout or two figuring out how to make an equilateral triangle out of rectangular pages of paper, and then scribbling on it.

The next possible tetrahedron will have twenty systems, and after that thirty-five. It only gets more complicated and less readable.

So... how're those cubes coming?

[edit: note that the verticies are connected to three other systems and all other systems are connected to six other systems. It will remian this way for tetrahedrons of any size.]

[ January 19, 2004, 17:37: Message edited by: Loser ]

Spoo	January 19th, 2004 07:43 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

You can figure out which planets are starting planets by checking their size and resource values.

So what if you made a map with many planets that had the proper size and resource values to be possible homeworlds.

Loser

January 19th, 2004 07:56 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

M'kay, twenty.<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> 1
/ \
2---3
/ \ / \
4---5---6
/ \ / \ / \
7---8---9---A
\ / \ / \ /
B---C---D
/ \ / \ / \
E---F---G---H
\ / \ / \
I---J---K</pre><hr /></blockquote>Additional connections:

1-K
2-K
2-E
3-K
3-H
4-B
4-E
6-D
6-H
E-J
E-K
F-J

Anyone want to check my work?

[ January 19, 2004, 17:56: Message edited by: Loser ]

geoschmo

January 19th, 2004 08:13 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

I have a 54 system cube on paper. Doing it in the map editor would take some time. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Ascii code I guess would look like:
<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> /---------------\
/ /-----------\ \
/ / /-------\ \ \
/ / / /-----F1-F2-F3-----\
/ / / / /---F4-F5-F6---\ \
/ / / / / /-F7-F8-F9-\ \ \
(D3)-A1-A2-A3-B1-B2-B3-C1-C2-C3-D1-D2-D3-(A1)
(D6)-A4-A5-A6-B4-B5-B6-C4-C5-C6-D4-D5-D6-(A4)
(D9)-A7-A8-A9-B7-B8-B9-C7-C8-C9-D7-D8-D9-(A7)
\ \ \-E1-E2-E3-/ / / / / /
\ \---E4-E5-E6---/ / / / /
\-----E7-E8-E9-----/ / / /
\ \ \-------/ / /
\ \-----------/ /
\---------------/</pre><hr /></blockquote>Geoschmo

54 systems, and no system is any more then 6 hops from any other system. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

[ January 19, 2004, 18:16: Message edited by: geoschmo ]

Loser

January 19th, 2004 08:28 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

And thirty-four (not thirty-five, I forgot that the one in the center of the stack doesn't count, though it could...)<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> 1
/ \
2---3
/ \ / \
4---5---6
/ \ / \ / \
7---8---9---A
/ \ / \ / \ / \
B---C---D---E---F
\ / \ / \ / \ /
G---H---I---J
/ \ / \ / \ / \
K---L---M---N---O
/ \ / \ / \ / \ / \
P---Q---R---S---T---U
\ / \ / \ / \
V---W---X---Y</pre><hr /></blockquote>Additional connections (ho-boy...):

1-Y
2-P
2-Y
3-U
3-Y
4-K
4-P
6-U
6-O
7-G
7-K
A-J
A-O
P-X
P-Y
Q-W
Q-X
R-W

Whew, I'm doing something usless while at work.

Situation: normal.

[ January 19, 2004, 18:29: Message edited by: Loser ]

Fyron

January 19th, 2004 08:41 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

geoschmo

January 19th, 2004 08:52 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

I had another interesting idea for a map a while back. This one you have to just visualize because I don't know how to represent it on paper. But all the warp points in every system are in one spot. Say in the center sector. Then you can travel several systems accross the map in one turn. I did it once with a random generated map that I went back through and moved all teh warp points. It took a while, but the result was pretty cool, I thought anyway.

tesco samoa

January 19th, 2004 09:12 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

People you are taking this to a really complex level.

The math is very simple. Please let me outline it here.

1.

http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/img929.png

where in the first step we made the change of summation variable http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/img930.png , and in the second step, we made use of the fact that any sum over all http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/img19.png terms is equivalent to a sum from 0 to http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/img577.png .

Now natually you will if you want to minimize your starting location seperation as N approaches infinity in the following series

http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/img1311.png

in other words, since you don't plan on creating an infinite amount (theorectical impossible except with hacking SEIV and changing the default player number by increasing it beyond the current level of 20) you really have the following formula -- which is an approximation that becomes more accurate with the larger the number of systems:

http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/img1325.png

There is a difference in spread between Sprial arm Quadrants (when maximizing the number of threads) and the Torus Quadrants-- in additiona the Sprial Arm Quadrant will limit starting locations based on a number of factors.

For this we look at the Fourier thereom as applied to Duration and Bandwidths as Second Moments (using the normalized second moments of the squared magnitude:

http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/img1630.png

where

http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/img1633.png

As you can all see this explains my point in an elemantary model that is easy to read and follow.

geoschmo

January 19th, 2004 09:16 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

sssssssssssssBOOM!

The sound of Geo's head exploding. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Fyron

January 19th, 2004 09:29 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Isn't Google wonderful Tesco? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

tesco samoa

January 19th, 2004 09:54 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

google i am alittle more refined than that cookie cutter search engine.

Yea I was being funny.... I was laughing the whole time i was making that post...

Fyron

January 19th, 2004 09:59 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

We all know you used Google Tesco. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Loser

January 19th, 2004 10:06 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Hmm... for the sake of readablilty it would probably be better to represent the tetrahedrons differently. Like this.<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> ---------------#-------------\
/ \ /---------\ \
| ----------------#---------\ \ \
|/ ------------\ / \ /-----\ \ \ \
||/ ------------#---#-----\ \ \ \ \
|||/ --------\ / \ / \ /-\ \ \ \ \ \
||||/ --------#---#---#-\ \ \ \ \ \ \
|||||/ ----\ / \ / \ / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
||||||/ #---#---#---#---#| | | | | | |
|||||\|/ \ / \ / \ / \ / | / / / / / /
||||| #---#---#---#---#--// / / / / /
|||\|/ \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / / / / / /
||| #---#---#---#---#---#-/ / / / /
|\|/ \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / / / /
\-#---#---#---#---#---#---#-/ / /
\ |\ |\ |\ / \ / \ / \ / /
\ \ \ \ \ \ #---#---#---#-/
\ \ \ \ \ \---/| /| /|
\ \ \ \ \-----/ / / / /
\ \ \ \-------/ / / /
\ \ \---------/ / /
\ \-----------/ /
\-------------/</pre><hr /></blockquote>Oh yeah, sure. That's more readable... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

[ January 19, 2004, 20:54: Message edited by: Loser ]

Loser

January 19th, 2004 11:03 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Next, the icosahedron!

PvK	January 19th, 2004 11:24 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Neat ideas.

I think for a competetive "fair" game, it makes a lot of sense to just show both players the map to start with. Otherwise, even without Ancient being used, there is a lot dependent on discovery, which is a shot in the dark.

The economics of the unmodded game favor the fastest, most massive expansion so much that rapid planet grabbing is the most important factor between skilled competetive players.

You guys are gonna make all these maps right?

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

The "Fair" map used in the Universe Cup tourney was, I thought, about as fair as could be. It is completely symmetrical (lozenge- or football- shaped), and players were allowed to study the map before play. It did get a bit dull playing on the same map after a while, though. Maybe someone could make some more maps that are completely symmetrical.

On the other hand, I tend to like randomized maps even if they aren't as fair.

Has anyone made any mods that have expansion economies half-way between Proportions and unmodded?

PvK

Fyron

January 19th, 2004 11:40 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Check out the B5 Mod. Or P&N PBW. Both of those have slowed down economic expansion, but certainly not as far as Proportions.

And for the record, even Proportions favors he who can expand the fastest. It is diluted, but fast expansion is still important.

[ January 19, 2004, 21:43: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

Loser

January 20th, 2004 12:53 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

I've never used the map editor. Is it possible to set up a static arrangement of systems and randomly populate them?

Loser

January 20th, 2004 02:17 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Alright, here it comes.<blockquote>code:<hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> /---------------\
|/-------------\ \
#-------------\ \ \
/-\ /|\ /---------\ \ \ \
/ /-# | #---------\ \ \ \|
/ / /|\|/|\ /-----\ \ \ \||
/ / || # | #-----\ \ \ \|||
|/ || |\|/|\ /-\ \ \ \||||
|| |\ | # | #-\ \ \ \|||||
|| | \|/|\|/|\ \ \ \||||||
|| | # | # || \ \|||||||
|| \ /|\|/| || \||||||||
|| /-# | # | /| |||||||||
|| / /|\|/|\|/ | |||||||||
||/ || # | # | |||||||||
||| || |\|/|\ / |||||||||
||| |\ | # | #-\ |||||||||
||| | \|/|\|/|\ \ |||||||||
||| | # | # || \|||||||||
||| \ /|\|/| || ||||||||||
||| /-# | # | /| ||||||||||
|||/ /|\|/|\|/ | ||||||||||
|||| || # | # | ||||||||||
|||| || |\|/|\ / ||||||||||
|||| |\ | # | #-\ ||||||||||
|||| | \|/|\|/|\ \||||||||||
|||| | # | # || |||||||||||
|||| \ /|\|/| || |||||||||||
||||/-# | # | /| |||||||||||
|||||/|\|/|\|/ | |||||||||||
||||||| # | # | |||||||||||
||||||| |\|/|\ / |||||||||||
||||||\ | # | #-\|||||||||||
|||\|\ \|/|\|/|\||||||||||||
\\\-# \ # | # ||||||||||||||
\\/ \|/|\|/| ||||||||||||||
\---# | # | /|||||||||||||
|\|/|\|/ /|/||||||||||
| # | # / #-/|||||||||
| |\|/|\|/ \-/////////
| | # | #----////////
| |/|\|/ \---///////
\ ||| #------//////
\\\\ \-----/////
\\\\-------////
\\\-------///
\\-------//
\-------/</pre><hr /></blockquote>Whoa, that one's messy.

I think there's an error.

Can you find it!?!?

[edit: by the way, that's an icosahedron with an extra system midway along each edge. you might be more liekyl to recognize an icosahedron if I called it a D20]

[ January 20, 2004, 00:28: Message edited by: Loser ]

dHay	January 20th, 2004 02:49 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

You could try for HyperCubes, which are one of the models minimizing the connectivity between multiprocessor systems. Ones with LOTS of processors. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

Remember, the perfectly predicable map is, ummm, BORING! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Fyron

January 20th, 2004 02:56 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

Originally posted by Loser:
I've never used the map editor. Is it possible to set up a static arrangement of systems and randomly populate them?

Sadly, no. Either you make an entire random map, or you have to add everything by hand.

geoschmo

January 20th, 2004 03:21 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Loser:
I've never used the map editor. Is it possible to set up a static arrangement of systems and randomly populate them?

Sadly, no. Either you make an entire random map, or you have to add everything by hand. <hr /></blockquote>Populating systems by hand in the Se4 map editor is drudgery to the extreme. I would not wish for it as a punishment for Sadaam. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

The easiest, and I say easiest only in relative terms cause it's still not easy by any subjective measure, is to randomly generate a quadrant with no warp points. You can then move the already populated systems around where you want them and add in the connecting warp points. But be prepared to take a long time and pull much of your hair out in the process. It's DULL work.

I have gone as far as starting a game on a map with no warp points and using in game stellar manip to create the warp points for special maps. That's how truely bad the editor is.

Geoschmo

Slynky

January 20th, 2004 03:54 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

"...that's how bad the editor truly is."

Hence the reason for my (somewhat lengthy) post in the editor thread a few pages down.

I started working on a symetrical map that was to be as balanced as a map could be:

All warp points were located at the same position in each system; 3 or 6 planets in each system...1 (or 2) of each planet type; the atmosphere throughout the galaxy was the same (so players would need to take the same atmosphere as each other); all percentages were the same on each planet in a system (some systems were higher, some lower); all planets were the same size; no planets had moons.

But it became a nightmare! In anger, I deleted it.

tesco samoa

January 20th, 2004 05:21 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

you people are too much sometimes.... I was showing this thread to people at work... They were laughing as well.. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif

I mean it in the funnest way....

Its what I like about this place.....

I smell NEEERDDDDDDDD http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Paul1980au

January 20th, 2004 05:29 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Sounds like the map editor needs an overhaul. That said i like maps with warp points that are many in number ie at least 8 warp points leading into each system.
You need choke points but perhaps you need fewer of them and a more open map ?

geoschmo

January 20th, 2004 05:57 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

Originally posted by Paul1980au:
That said i like maps with warp points that are many in number ie at least 8 warp points leading into each system.
You need choke points but perhaps you need fewer of them and a more open map ?

That's fun, and one of the easier maps to make. You can setup the quadrant types file to make heavily connected maps randomly at game starup. FQM has a few different styles of varying degree.

geoschmo

January 20th, 2004 06:09 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

Originally posted by tesco samoa:
I smell NEEERDDDDDDDD http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

This coming from the guy who posted the Fourier thereom. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif

narf poit chez BOOM

January 20th, 2004 07:28 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Quote:

I smell NEEERDDDDDDDD

Nerds are tasty.

Kamog

January 20th, 2004 07:57 AM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

In the summation equations, what are the terms x, y, N, m, n, and l?
The first equation looks like the proof for the commutative property of a convolution between x and y, i.e. if you convolute x with y, it gives the same result as y convoluted with x. How does this relate to the quadrant maps?

And what do fourier theorms and bandwidths have to do with the maps. Why are we using a continuous integral from minus infinity to plus infinity, when the quantity we are discussing is not continuous but discrete. The summation should suffice, shouldn't it? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Nerds are tasty but they're bad for your teeth. I think they're just globs of sugar with a bit of color and artificial flavor. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Cipher7071

January 20th, 2004 04:35 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

Hmmmmm..... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif .......It seems that I may have created a monster here......er......maybe more than one. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

tesco samoa

January 20th, 2004 06:42 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

hey i have actually used that thereom at work. Maybe 10 to 20 times...

Never thought I would. Who woulda funk Calc. at work... Good thing I had a solid understanding from High School , University and College... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

Also I kept all those text books... And used one of them once....

Paul1980au

January 20th, 2004 11:50 PM

Re: Maps, theory discussion

You know what i havent seen the game that could make it more interesting is randomly occouring natural wormholes that remain open for say 5 game turns. This could be a random event aspect ie temporary wormhole has opened to x system and our scientists expect it to remain open for x turns where it will naturally dissapate (could also happen to normal wormholes i know they close in this way as a random event) - like to see it happen a bit more often in the game also.
Or perhaps wormhole malfunction where a ship disappears when it goes through or ends up in a completley different system.

This might annoy players as they prepare for an invasion but could make the game way more interesting.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:18 PM.